Macrophilia is a fairly widespread trait, and is found in individuals of many different ethnic and social backgrounds. No common element has yet been found that can point to an environmental cause, although three characteristics are repeatedly seen:
Macrophilia manifests itself in very early childhood. Children with macrophilic tendencies commonly exhibit a sexual or pseudo-sexual response to giants long before physical puberty. Macrophilia is almost always a guilty pleasure. This is perhaps related to the previous observation, as sexuality in very young children is looked down upon, and the associated repression and guilt carry over into adulthood. Macrophiles are extremely shy about their tendencies, even among sympathetic peers, and to a greater degree than other fetishists. It is felt that this is the singular reason that macrophilia has not been more thoroughly reported in the literature of various cultures. Macrophiles usually feel isolated, and believe that few if any others share their desires.
The specific stimuli which elicit a sexual response in a macrophile, while varied, tend to fall into two broad categories, which are not mutually exclusive. They are summarized here as directly sexual situations and indirectly sexual or fixational situations.
Directly sexual stimuli are the more easily understood. These involve situations in which sexual contact occurs between creatures (human or otherwise) whose physical size differs by greater than (as an arbitrary delimiter) a factor of two, and often much more. Such situations commonly involve the following:
Full-body contact with the genitalia of a male giant, or full-body
insertion into the vagina of a female
Indirectly sexual or fixational situations involve other fetishes that often go hand-in-hand with macrophilia. Interestingly, these "other" preoccupations do not always manifest themselves in non-macrophilic situations, but rather will only be observed when a giant and/or a tiny person are involved. They include:
Sadism/masochism: pleasure is achieved by being physically harmed or even
killed by a giant - Dominance/submission: pleasure is derived from being
at the mercy of a giant, or from being in control of a tiny person
As previously stated, the macrophile will often find one or more of these practices unappealing or even repugnant in "normal" situations; yet, when they are being perpetrated by or upon a giant, they suddenly become attractive. Similarly, the distinction between heterosexuality and homosexuality is sometimes blurred or reduced to zero, as staunchly heterosexual macrophiles will often find themselves attracted to the images of giants or tiny persons of the same sex, and vice-versa.
A simplistic view of macrophilia holds that persons who are of a submissive sexual nature often prefer to view themselves in the role of the tiny person interacting with a giant creature, whereas those of a dominant sexual nature view themselves as a giant. Whereas this may indeed be true in a certain number of cases, it is far from a complete picture. A significant number of macrophiles exhibit the opposite behavior, while others are content with either role, regardless of their own sexual leanings. This group seems to enjoy the situation itself, rather than the specific role being played, and are thus equally excited by the view from the top, from the bottom, or from that of the omniscient observer.
Any study of psychosexual phenomena should include mention of the question of latency. There are subjects who claim to have developed macrophilic tendencies after postpubescent exposure to it. It is a matter of debate whether these individuals are "true" macrophiles who simply did not recognize or were unwilling to acknowledge earlier tendencies, or are simply expanding upon existing tendencies which become much more pronounced when the sexual partner is gigantic. A hypothesis has been put forth that the question can by answered for purely fixational macrophiles by examining whether a fetish existed before macrophilia was discovered and whether it persists in the absence of a giant; while intuitive, this hypothesis has yet to undergo any rigorous testing. Thus, at this time, the question of latent macrophilia remains the subject of debate.
In conclusion, it should be noted once more that macrophilia is far from
rare, as evidenced by the growing number of admitted macrophiles that have
come forth in recent years. A suggestion that it is actually quite common
can be found in the popularity of cinematic films featuring giant
monsters, which draw in enormous crowds and cult followings in spite of
sometimes questionable quality. Perhaps, deep in the psyche of many of the
thousands of moviegoers, sits the child who wrestled with unfamiliar and
frightening sensations at the tale of Jack and the Beanstalk, and who now
laughs raucously –
yet nervously –
at the object of desire who rages across the screen, leaving the viewer
feeling aroused, nervous, and deeply, utterly alone.